Advertisement

Examining the Complexity of the Out-of-Field Teacher Experience Through Multiple Theoretical Lenses

  • Linda HobbsEmail author
  • Anna E. du Plessis
  • Frances Quinn
  • Emily Rochette
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter will draw on and interrogate a range of theoretical approaches to examining teachers’ experiences of teaching across specialisations. Teaching is a complex work, but teaching a subject without the necessary background presents its own set of challenges, both practically in the classroom and personally for the teacher. Different theoretical perspectives highlight different aspects of the experience. Four theoretical perspectives will be explored for their emphasis on where the individual teacher is placed within and how they negotiate the intersection of their practice, sense of self and the social and cultural context. The four theoretical perspectives will include Positioning Theory, Cultural Historical Activity Theory, Boundary Crossing and Lived Experience. The chapter will use research from the authors to illustrate the explanatory power of these theories in understanding the experience of teaching across subjects.

Keywords

Teaching out-of-field Teaching across specialisations Cultural-historical activity theory Boundary crossing Epistemological perspective Context-consciousness Lived experience Positioning theory 

References

  1. Adams, J., Cochrane, M., & Dunne, L. (2012). Introduction. In J. Adams, M. Cochrane, & L. Dunne (Eds.), Applying theory to educational research: An introductory approach with case studies (pp. 1–10). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81, 132–169.Google Scholar
  3. Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2012). Crossing boundaries between school and work during apprenticeships. Vocations & Learning, 5, 153–173.Google Scholar
  4. Akkerman, S. F. & Van Eijck, M. (2013). Re-theorising the student dialogically across and between boundaries of multiple communities. British Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 60–72.Google Scholar
  5. Anfara, V. A., & Mertz, N. T. (2015). Setting the Scene. In V. A. Anfara & N. T. Mertz (Eds.), Theoretical framework in qualitative research (pp. 1–20). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Annells, M. (2006). Triangulation of qualitative approaches: Hermeneutical phenomenology and grounded theory. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 56(1), 55–61.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03979.Google Scholar
  7. Anyon, J. (2008). Introduction: Critical social theory, education research, and intellectual agency. In J. Anyon (Ed.), Theory and educational research: Toward critical social explanation (pp. 1–24). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words (2d ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bacchi, C. (1999). Women, Policy and Politics: the construction of policy problems. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Ball, S. J. (1995). Intellectuals or technicians? The urgent role of theory in educational studies. British Journal of Educational Studies, 43, 255–271.Google Scholar
  11. Barnacle, R. (2001). Phenomenology and wonder. In R. Barnacle (Ed.), Phenomenology (pp. 1–15). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Berg, B. (2004). Qualitative research methods for the social science (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  13. Blazar, D. (2015). Grade assignments and the teacher pipeline: A low-cost lever to improve student achievement? Educational Researcher, 44(4), 213–227.Google Scholar
  14. Bosse, M. & Törner, G. (2015). Teacher identity as a theoretical framework for researching out-of-field teaching mathematics teachers. In C. Bernack, R. Erens, A. Eichler, & T. Leuders (Eds.), Views and beliefs in mathematics education-contributions of the 19th MAVI conference (pp. 1–14).Google Scholar
  15. Boudah, D. (2011). Conducting educational research: Guide to completing a major project. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Bourdieu, P. (1979). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. Brewer, M. (2005). Reaching out: Across disciplines, across cultures. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 217–219.Google Scholar
  19. Burns, E., & Bell, S. (2011). Narrative construction of professional teacher identity of teachers with dyslexia. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(5), 952–960.Google Scholar
  20. Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research. (n.d.). New Forms of Work and Learning. Retrieved from http://www.edu.helsinki.fi/activity/pages/research/newform.
  21. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1996). Teachers’ professional knowledge landscapes: Teacher stories, stories of teachers, school stories, stories of schools. Educational Researcher, 25(3), 24–30.Google Scholar
  23. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). London: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  24. Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon, (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1–46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Crist, J., & Tanner, C. (2003). Interpretation/analysis methods in hermeneutic interpretive phenomenology. Nursing Research, 52(3), 202–205.Google Scholar
  26. Dall’Alba, G., & Barnacle, R. (2005). Embodied knowing in online environments. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 37(5), 719–744.Google Scholar
  27. Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20(1), 43–63.Google Scholar
  28. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1999). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  29. Diaz, V. H. (2012). Beginning teachers’ production of pedagogical content knowledge: A cultural historical perspective. Arizona State University.Google Scholar
  30. Dimitriadis, G. (2008). Series editor introduction. In J. Anyon (Ed.), Theory and educational research: Toward critical social explanation (pp. vii–ix). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Dubois, S. L., & Luft, J. A. (2014). Science teachers without classrooms of their own: A study of the phenomenon of floating. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(1), 5–23.Google Scholar
  32. Du Plessis, A. (2014). Understanding the out-of-field teaching experience. Ph.D. thesis, School of Education, The University of Queensland. http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:330372.
  33. Du Plessis, A. (Forthcoming 2018). Professional learning and development in the teaching arena. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.Google Scholar
  35. Engeström, Y. (1990). When is a tool? multiple meanings of artifacts in human activity. In Y. Engeström (Ed.), Learning, working and imagining: Twelve studies in activity theory (pp. 171–195). Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.Google Scholar
  36. Engeström, Y. (1998). Reorganising the motivational sphere of classroom culture: An activity-theoretical analysis of planning in a teacher team. In F. Seeger, J. Voigt, & U. Waschescio (Eds.), The culture of the mathematics classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analysing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 377–404). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of education and work, 14(1), 133–156.Google Scholar
  39. Engeström, Y. (2015). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research (2 ed.). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Kärkkäinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and Instruction, 5(4), 319–336.Google Scholar
  41. Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R.-L. (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Engeström, Y., & Office, I. L. (1994). Training for change: New approach to instruction and learning in working life. International Labour Office Geneva.Google Scholar
  44. Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  45. Gadamer, H. (1975). Truth and method (2nd ed.) (J.C.B. Mohr, Trans.). New York: The Seabury Press.Google Scholar
  46. Gadamer, H. (1976). Philosophical hermeneutics. (D. Linge, Trans. Ed. 2008). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  47. Goos, M. (2015). Learning at the boundaries. In M. Marshman, V. Geiger, & A. Bennison (Eds.). Mathematics education in the margins. Proceedings of the 38th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 269–276). Sunshine Coast: MERGA.Google Scholar
  48. Grondin, J. (2002). Gadamer’s basic understanding of understanding (pp. 36–51). The Cambridge Companion to Gadamer.Google Scholar
  49. Gunckel, K. L. (2013). Fulfilling multiple obligations: Preservice elementary teachers’ use of an instructional model while learning to plan and teach science. Science Education, 97(1), 139–162.Google Scholar
  50. Haring, E. (1962). The ontological principle. The Review of Metaphysics: A Philosophical Quarterly, 16(1), 3–13. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20123918.pdf.
  51. Harré, R. (2002). Cognitive science: A philosophical introduction. Sage.Google Scholar
  52. Harré, R. (2012). Positioning theory: Moral dimensions of social-cultural psychology.Google Scholar
  53. Harré, R., & Dedaic, M. (2012). Positioning theory, narratology, and pronoun analysis as discursive therapies. In Discursive perspectives in therapeutic practice (pp. 45–64).Google Scholar
  54. Harré, R., & Moghaddam, F. M. (2003). Introduction: The self and others in traditional psychology and in positioning theory. In R. Harré, & F. M. Moghaddam (Eds.), The self and others : positioning individuals and groups in personal, political, and cultural contexts (pp. vi, 322 p.). Westport, Conn.: Praeger.Google Scholar
  55. Harré, R., Moghaddam, F. M., Cairnie, T. P., Rothbart, D., & Sabat, S. R. (2009). Recent advances in positioning theory. Theory & Psychology, 19(1), 5–31.Google Scholar
  56. Harré, R., & Slocum, N. (2003). Disputes as complex social events: on the uses of positioning theory. Common Knowledge, 9(1), 19.Google Scholar
  57. Harré, R., & van Langenhove, L. (1999). Introducing positioning theory. In R. Harré, & L. van Langenhove (Eds.), Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action (pp. vi, 216 p.). Oxford; Malden, Mass: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  58. Heidegger. M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie, & E. Robinson, Trans.). New York: Harper & Row Publishers, Incorporated.Google Scholar
  59. Heidegger, M. (1999). Ontology–The hermeneutics of facticity (J. Van Buren, Trans.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Herbel-Eisenmann, B., Sinclair, N., Chval, K. B., Clements, D. H., Civil, M., Pape, S. J. & Wilkerson, T. L. (2016). Positioning mathematics education researchers to influence storylines. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47(2), 102–117.Google Scholar
  61. Herbel-Eisenmann, B., Wagner, D., Johnson, K. R., Suh, H., & Figueras, H. (2015). Positioning in mathematics education: Revelations on an imported theory. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 89(2), 185–204.Google Scholar
  62. Hobbs, L. (2012). Teaching out-of-field: Factors shaping identities of secondary science and mathematics. Teaching Science, 58(1), 32–40.Google Scholar
  63. Hobbs, L. (2013a). Teaching ‘out-of-field’ as a boundary-crossing event: Factors shaping teacher identity. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(2), 271–297.Google Scholar
  64. Hobbs, L. (2013b). Boundary crossings of out-of-field teachers: Locating learning possibilities amid disruption. In J. Langan-Fox, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Boundary-spanning in organizations: Network, influence, and conflict (pp. 7–28). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  65. Holland, D., & Reeves, J. R. (1994). Activity theory and the view from somewhere: Team perspectives on the intellectual work of programming. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1(1–2), 8–24.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039409524654.Google Scholar
  66. Howie, D., & Peters, M. (1996). Positioning theory: Vygotsky, Wittgenstein and social constructionist psychology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 26(1), 51–64.Google Scholar
  67. Jakab, C. (2013). Small talk: Children’s everyday ‘molecule’ideas. Research in Science Education, 43(4), 1307–1325.Google Scholar
  68. Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2003). Student motivation in co-operative groups: Social interdependence theory. In R. Gillies & A. Ashman (Eds.), Co-operative learning: The social and intellectual outcomes of learning in groups (pp. 136–176). London: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  69. Kaptelinin, V., & Miettinen, R. (2005). Introduction: Perspectives on the object of activity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 1–3.Google Scholar
  70. Kazemi, E., & Hubbard, A. (2008). New directions for the design and study of professional development: Attending to the coevolution of teachers’ participation across contexts. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 428–441.Google Scholar
  71. King, C. (2008). Geoscience education: An overview. Studies in Science Education, 44(2), 187–222.Google Scholar
  72. Kislov, R. (2013). Boundary discontinuity in a constellation of interconnected practices. Public Administration, 92(2), 307–323.Google Scholar
  73. Kumpulainen, K., & Sefton-Green, J. (2014). What is connected learning and how to research it? International Journal of Learning and Media, 4(2), 7–18.Google Scholar
  74. Ladson-Billings, G., & Donnor, J. (2005). The moral activist role of critical race theory scholarship. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The sage handbook of quality research (3rd ed., pp. 279–302). California: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  75. Lantz-Andersson, A., Vigmo, S., & Bowen, R. (2013). Crossing boundaries in Facebook: Students’ framing of language learning activities as extended spaces. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8, 293–312.Google Scholar
  76. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1990). Situated learning: legitimate periperal participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Laverty, S. (2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: A comparison of historical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(3). Retrieved from http://www.ualberta.ca/-iiqm/backissues/2_3final/pdf/laverty.Google Scholar
  79. Leontiev, A. N. (1981). Problems of the development of the mind. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
  80. Lewis, E. B., & Baker, D. R. (2010). A call for a new geoscience education research agenda. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 121–129.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20320.Google Scholar
  81. Maggs-Rapport, F. (2001). Methodological issues in nursing research: ‘Best research practice’: In pursuit of methodological rigour. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 35(3), 373–383.Google Scholar
  82. Miettinen, R., & Virkkunen, J. (2005). Epistemic objects, artefacts and organizational change. Organization, 12(3), 437–456.Google Scholar
  83. Miettinen, R., Paavola, S., & Pohjola, P. (2012). From habituality to change: Contribution of activity theory and pragmatism to practice theories. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 42(3), 345–360.Google Scholar
  84. Moghaddam, F. M., Harré, R., Lee, N., & SpringerLink (Online service). (2008). Global conflict resolution through positioning analysis Peace psychology book series (pp. xiv, 302 p.). Retrieved from SpringerLink http://dx.doi.org.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/10.1007/978-0-387-72112-5 (Connect to electronic book, University of Melbourne only).
  85. Penuel, W. R., & Wertsch, J. V. (1995). Vygotsky and identity formation: A sociocultural approach. Educational Psychologist, 30(2), 83.Google Scholar
  86. Phillips, D., Fawns, R., & Hayes, B. (2002). From personal reflection to social positioning: The development of a transformational model of professional education in midwifery. Nursing inquiry, 9(4), 239–249.Google Scholar
  87. Phillips, D. J., & Hayes, B. (2006). Moving towards a model of professional identity formation in midwifery through conversations and positioning theory. Australian journal of adult learning, 46, 224–242.Google Scholar
  88. Phillips, D. J., & Hayes, B. (2008). Securing the oral tradition: Reflective positioning and professional conversations in midwifery education. Collegian, 15(3), 109–114.Google Scholar
  89. Ramsten, A.-C., & Säljö, R. (2012). Communities, boundary practices, and incentives for knowledge sharing? A study of the deployment of a digital control system in a process industry as a learning activity. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 1, 33–44.Google Scholar
  90. Redman, C. (2004). Meaning making with real time images of Earth in space. Ph.D., University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  91. Redman, C. (2013a). Agentive roles, rights and duties in a technological era. In R. Harré, & F. M. Moghaddam (Eds.), The psychology of friendship and enmity: Relationships in love, work, politics, and war (pp. 2, vols).Google Scholar
  92. Redman, C. (2013b). The social, cultural and affective factors that support good practices with new technologies. In C. Redman & D. Coyle (Eds.), Successful science education practices: Exploring what, why, and how they worked (pp. x, 310 p.). Hauppauge, New York: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  93. Redman, C. (2013c). Successful science education practices: Exploring what, why, and how they worked. Hauppauge, New York: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  94. Redman, C., & Fawns, R. (2010). How to use pronoun grammar analysis as a methodological tool for understanding the dynamic lived space of people In S. Rodrigues (Ed.), Using analytical frameworks for classroom research collecting data and analysing narrative (1. ed., pp. 1 online resource (220 p.)). Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. Retrieved from http://UNIMELB.eblib.com.au/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=481129. (Connect to ebook, University of Melbourne only).
  95. Redman, C., & Rodrigues, S. (2008). Researching the relationships in the technologies of self: Habitus and capacities. Paper presented at the Australian Association of research in Education (AARE), Queensland Univeristy of Technology, Kelvin Grove Campus, Brisbane.Google Scholar
  96. Regan, P. (2012). Hans-Georg Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics: Concepts of reading, understanding and interpretation. Research in Hermeneutics, Phenomenology, and Practical Philosophy, 4(2), 286–303.Google Scholar
  97. Rochette, E., Redman, C., & Chandler, P. (2017). Complementary methodologies: positioning theory and grounded theory. Paper presented at the Contemporary Approaches to Research in Mathematics, Science, Health and Environmental Education Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
  98. Roe, R. M. (2015). Repositioning teacher agency in the discourse of educational change: A study of the early socialization of networked technologies in Melbourne schools. Ph.D. thesis, Melbourne, University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  99. Rogoff, B. (2008). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In K. Hall, P. Murphy, & J. Soler (Eds.), Pedagogy and practice: Culture and identities (pp. 58–74). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  100. Roth, W.-M. (2004). Activity theory and education: An introduction. mind, culture, and activity, 11(1), 1–8.Google Scholar
  101. Roth, W.-M. (2009). On the inclusion of emotions, identity, and ethico-moral dimensions of actions. In Learning and expanding with activity theory (pp. 53–71).Google Scholar
  102. Roth, W.-M. (2012). Cultural-historical activity theory: Vygotsky’s forgotten and suppressed legacy and its implication for mathematics education. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 24(1), 87–104.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-011-0032-1.Google Scholar
  103. Roth, W.-M., & Lee, Y.-J. (2007). “Vygotsky’s neglected legacy”: Cultural-historical activity theory. Review of Educational Research, 77(2), 186–232.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654306298273.Google Scholar
  104. Roth, W.-M., & Tobin, K. (2004). Coteaching: From praxis to theory. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 10(2), 161–180.Google Scholar
  105. Saka, Y., Southerland, S. A., & Brooks, J. S. (2009). Becoming a member of a school community while working toward science education reform: Teacher induction from a cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) perspective. Science Education, 93(6), 996–1025.Google Scholar
  106. Säljö, R. (2003). Epilogue: From transfer to boundary-crossing. In T. Tuomi-Gröhn, & Y. Engeström (Eds.), Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary-crossing (pp. 311–321). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  107. Schutz, A., & Luckmann, T. (1973). The structures of the life-world. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  108. Shimizu, Y. (2002). Capturing the structure of Japanese mathematics lessons: Some findings of the international comparative studies. In D. Edge, & Y. B. Har (Eds.), Proceedings of second East Asia regional conference on mathematics education and ninth Southeast Asian conference on mathematics education. Invited papers: Plenary lectures and regular lectures (Vol. 1, pp. 168–176). Singapore: National Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  109. Star, S. L. (1989). The structure of ill-structured solutions: Boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem-solving. In L. Gasser & M. N. Huhns (Eds.), Distributed artificial intelligence (Vol. II, pp. 37–54). London: Pitman.Google Scholar
  110. Tan, J. P. I. (2015). Examining the socialisation of new teachers through the lenses of positioning theory and micropolitical theory. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(1), 177–188.Google Scholar
  111. Tan, S.-L., & Moghaddam, F. M. (1999). Positions in intergroup relations. In R. Harré, & L. V. Lagenhove (Eds.), Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action (pp. vi, 216 p.). Malden, Mass: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  112. Van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6(3), 205–228.Google Scholar
  113. Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. New York: The State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  114. Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA). (2015). The Victorian Curriculum F-10 (VCSIS136). Retrieved from http://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/science/curriculum/f-10#level=9–10.
  115. VCAA. (2015). Science: Structure. Retrieved from http://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/science/introduction/structure.
  116. VCAA. (2016). Digital Technologies: Learning in Digital Technologies. Retrieved from http://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/technologies/digital-technologies/introduction/learning-in-digital-technologies.
  117. Vessey, D. (2007). Gadamer’s hermeneutic contribution to a theory of time-consciousness. The Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology, 7(2), 1–7.Google Scholar
  118. Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language (E. Hanfmann & G. Vakar, Eds. and Trans). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  119. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Pres.Google Scholar
  120. Weldon, P. (2016). Out-of-field teaching in secondary schools. In Policy insights, (vol. 6). Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  121. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  122. Wittgenstein, L., & Anscombe, G. E. M. (1953). Philosophical investigations. Oxford Eng.: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  123. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C., & Haudenschild, M. T. (2009). Using activity systems analysis to identify inner contradictions in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(3), 507–517.Google Scholar
  124. Zahavi, D. (2003). Husserl’s phenomenology. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linda Hobbs
    • 1
    Email author
  • Anna E. du Plessis
    • 2
  • Frances Quinn
    • 3
  • Emily Rochette
    • 4
  1. 1.Linda Hobbs, Deakin UniversityGeelongAustralia
  2. 2.Institute for Learning Sciences and Teacher EducationBrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.University of New EnglandArmidaleAustralia
  4. 4.University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations